Category Archives: Human Genetics

Swedens Olink Holding (Nasdaq: OLK) has announced that Oxford Genomics at the University of Oxford is adopting its technology, becoming the UKs first Olink lab.

It is hoped that the partnership will enable new techniques to unravel mechanisms of disease using the Olink Explore platform.

"We are trying to make the drug development process more precise by understanding the heterogeneity in the patients instead of one drug fits all"According

This article is accessible to registered users, to continue reading please register for free. A free trial will give you access to exclusive features, interviews, round-ups and commentary from the sharpest minds in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology space for a week. If you are already a registered user pleaselogin. If your trial has come to an end, you cansubscribe here.

Try before you buy

All the news that moves the needle in pharma and biotech. Exclusive features, podcasts, interviews, data analyses and commentary from our global network of life sciences reporters. Receive The Pharma Letter daily news bulletin, free forever.

Become a subscriber

Unfettered access to industry-leading news, commentary and analysis in pharma and biotech. Updates from clinical trials, conferences, M&A, licensing, financing, regulation, patents & legal, executive appointments, commercial strategy and financial results. Daily roundup of key events in pharma and biotech. Monthly in-depth briefings on Boardroom appointments and M&A news. Choose from a cost-effective annual package or a flexible monthly subscription.

Visit link:
Oxford's adoption of Olink tech to 'unravel mechanisms of disease' - The Pharma Letter

National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins speaks at the 2019 BioLogos Conference in Baltimore, Maryland on March 27, 2019. | THE CHRISTIAN POST

There is always a dilemma for Christians in best handling and reacting to the positions and counsel of Christian leaders. Often these are people we have grown to trust and respect as followers of Christ.

Their convictions at times are consistent with Christian principles and biblical wisdom. They champion appropriate positions and defend causes from a historically Christian perspective. They gain traction and respect even among cultural, political, and religious opponents because of the internally consistent strength of their arguments and their winsome and gracious demeanor.

And yet, it is impossible for any fallen and sinful person to be right all the time. Similarly, it is quite possible and regularly demonstrated that the unregenerate are not always wrong.

As a case in point, contrast Dr. Francis Collins and President Donald Trump.

Trump, not convincingly a born-again Christian, became president in large measure because he promised to represent conservative Christians and their concerns. His appointing of originalist judges to federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as his attendance at events like the annual March for Life while he was in office (this was unprecedented for a president), were encouragements to many Christians. Yet his demeanor was consistently characterized as non-Christian. Such may well have cost him re-election. Christians and conservative political analysts will debate for decades whether he was a net positive or negative influence on America. Clearly, both cases can be made. Different Christian voices have weighed in on the matter. Many Christians, even conservatives, felt that Trump used them for his personal gain and prestige.

In certain notable ways, a case could be made that the Francis Collins situation at times echoes the debate over Donald Trump among Christians.

Dr. Francis Collins, the famous geneticist, was and is vocally Christian. He has clearly identified as such, and he has taken heat for it. For example, in the summer of 2009, after his nomination as director of NIH by President Barack Obama, outspoken atheist Sam Harris attacked Collins in theNew York Timesas unfit for the job because of his religious convictions.

Collins became known to many Americans during his direction of the Human Genome Project through the 1990s. In February 1998,Scientific Americanprofiled Dr. Collins with the headline Where Science and Religion meet: The U.S. head of the Human Genome Project, Francis S. Collins, stives to keep his Christianity from interfering with his science and politics. That article quoted Dr. Collins saying he is intensely uncomfortable with abortion. He said that he does not advocate changing the law and is very careful to ensure his personal feelings on abortion do not affect his political stance.

The article went on to say: researchers and academics familiar with Collins work agree that he has separated his private religious views from his professional life. He shows no influence of religious beliefs on his work other than a generalized sensitivity to ethics issues in genetics.

In essence, what these people were saying is that Francis Collins is such a good scientist because you can hardly tell he is a Christian from his work.

As a much younger biology professor at the time, I was aghast at this. A Christian has separated his religious views from his professional life. Why is that a good thing?

I emailed Dr. Collins at the time, asking him ifScientific Americanhad it right. Maybe the article misunderstood Collins? My email was never answered. Not that I expected that it would be, given my obscurity and his standing and responsibilities. Still, the article troubled me, as I was always left with the lingering question.

Dr. Collins went on to launch the BioLogos Foundation, a Christian/science interface organization that advocates for the reconciliation of modern science and Christianity. The idea is that nature and Scripture are both from God and ultimately are not in conflict. This reflects Dr. Collins Christian convictions and his love of science, the study of Gods physical world. Give Dr. Collins credit for leveraging his popularity, leadership qualities, and obvious pastoral instincts for the noble cause.

Ultimately, I met Dr. Collins several years ago at a conference and heard him speak. There is no reason he would remember our quick contact in an elevator any more than he would remember my email. However, one cannot help but be impressed by his genuine humility and his concern for the spiritual health of the people around him. He has made it clear that he believes that Jesus Christ is incarnate and divine and that humans are made in the image of God (although he rejects the historic Adam), and that salvation is real.

Yet, inconsistencies remain. Dr. Collins seems to allow his science to inordinately arbitrate over biblical truth, or at least when the two are portrayed as in conflict. As his professional life has unfolded, it has become clear that theScientific Americanarticle had gotten a lot right. It is fair to say that he has remained uncertain about when human life begins. He concedes that the fertilized egg is alive at conception, but believes that maybe it is not quite human. Consequently, in his 2010 book,The Language of Life,he advocated for experimentation using excess human embryos fromin vitro fertilization(IVF) that are stuck in cryo-storage with uncertain futures, so that some good could come from them. He has never publicly disavowed human embryonic research because he sees its potential fruitfulness. In fact, as late as last summer, experiments involving human embryonic cells and mice was supported by NIH funding at the University of Pittsburgh.

There are ongoing ramifications of Dr. Collins acceptance of abortion as the law of the land. TheScientific Americanarticle in 1998 mentioned that Dr. Collins was concerned that embryonic genetic testing might lead to abortions of fetuses that have conditions that are less than disastrous. The article did not suggest what he would consider less than disastrous. For instance, would my great-nephews Downs syndrome condition be considered less than a disaster?

Princeton bioethicist and legal scholar, Dr. Robert George, made a clearer case in his 1998 address to the American Political Science Association Convention, stating, once I was a child, once I was an infant, once I was an embryo, I cannot say I was once an egg or a sperm. However, it is clear that the viable sperm and egg are quite alive. Also, it is good to remember what we say in the Apostles Creed. He was conceived born suffered died and rose again.

What human is not on that trajectory of life and death? The Bible teaches that we all are.

This leaves many conservative Christians convinced that Dr. Collins would rather come down on the side of a quote from his old boss, President Barack Obama. In March 2009, Obama signed an executive order that lifted President George W. Bushs 2001 ban on federal funding of human embryonic research. Today we will lift the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research, stated Obama. We will vigorously support scientists who pursue this research. And we will aim for America to lead the world in the discoveries it one day may yield. Obama continued, Promoting science isnt just about providing resources it is also about protecting free and open inquiry. It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.

Obama insisted that Im going to let scientists do science. Im going to remove politics, religion, and ideology from that.

Of course, the reality is that such a thing cannot be done. The presidents own politics and ideology were clearly stated and inserted.

One would hope that Dr. Collins would be more comfortable with the principles articulated in President George W. Bushs 2006 State of the Union Address. A hopeful society has institutions of science and medicine that do not cut ethical corners, and that recognize the matchless value of every life, stated Bush. Tonight, I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research human cloning in all its forms creating or implanting embryos for experiments creating human-animal hybrids and buying, selling, or patenting human embryos. Human life is a gift from our Creatorand that gift should never be discarded, devalued, or put up for sale.

These are all ethical issues that have confronted Dr. Francis Collins as a man of science and of faith. The issues more recently included COVID mask and vaccine mandates. To many in the evangelical community, the pro-life appeals he made for the mandates have rung increasingly hollow, and his seeming inconsistencies have been bothersome.

Os Guinness, in his book,The Magna Carta of Humanity, brings out a principle that every intentional Christian should keep in mind: The notion of arguing on behalf of the true, the right, and the good lies behind the biblical principle of corrigibility. Guinness quotes Jewish Hebrew scholar Jonathan Sacks, We are all open to challenge. No one is above criticism, no one is too junior to administer it, if done with due grace and humility.

This requires knowing scripture and applying its logical conclusions, consistently. Otherwise, our ability to be salt and light is diminished, and we can be played. Francis Collins needs to add salt and light. Many of us have admired him, and we expect more from him in his Christian witness to science.

Dr. Jan Dudt is a professor of biology at Grove City College and fellow for medical ethics with the Institute for Faith & Freedom. He teaches as part of colleges required core course Studies in Science, Faith and Technology wherein students, among other things, study all the major origins theories and are asked to measure them in the light of biblical authority.

See the original post:
Christian leaders and controversies: The case of Francis Collins - The Christian Post

BETHESDA, Md., May 10, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The National Coordinating Center for the Regional Genetics Network (NCC) is excited to announce that the third annual Public Health Genetics Week will be held from May 23-27, 2022. The goal of Public Health Genetics Week is to increase awareness and celebrate the field of public health genetics.

Each day of Public Health Genetics Week will have a different theme:

Individuals and organizations are encouraged to participate in the week by using the hashtags #PHGW and #PublicHealthGenetics across their social media platforms.

A number of events will be held throughout the week to celebrate public health genetics for professionals, students, and the general public. They include:

For All Partners in Public Health Genetics

For Professionals

For the General Public

For Students

OnPHGW.org, you can find more information about the daily themes and events that will be held throughout the week. Additionally, there are fun, interactive activities such as our PHGW Book Club (discussed on TikTok), coloring pages, a digital escape room, and puzzles. Social media tools (such as daily social media images, GIFs, social media banners, and more) can also be found on the website,phgw.org/toolkit.

For questions or comments about Public Health Genetics Week, please contactphgw@phgw.org and be sure to follow NCC (@nccrcg) onFacebook,Instagram,LinkedIn,TikTok, andTwitterfor the latest updates on the week.

About the National Coordinating Center for the Regional Genetics Networks (NCC)

Funded since 2004 by the Health Resources and Services Administration/Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB) to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG), NCC's mission is to improve access to genetic services for underserved populations. In collaboration with the seven Regional Genetics Network (RGNs) and the National Genetics Education and Family Support Center (NGEFSC), achieves this mission by working in the following focus areas: genetics and genomics education; genetics policy education; telemedicine; and data collection and evaluation. Learn more about the efforts of the NCC athttps://nccrcg.org.

NCC Funding Acknowledgement

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under Cooperative Agreement #UH9MC30770-01-00 from 6/2020-5/2024 for $800,000 per award year. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.

Related Images

Image 1: Public Health Genetics Week

Logo of Public Health Genetics Week with a dark purple to dark blue gradient

This content was issued through the press release distribution service at Newswire.com.

See original here:
The Third Annual Public Health Genetics Week is Around the Corner - May 23-27, 2022 - GlobeNewswire

How The Mobile Phone Market Has Evolved Since 1993

The mobile phone landscape looks drastically different today than it did three decades ago.

In 1993, Motorola accounted for more than half of the mobile phone market. But by 2021, its market share had shrunk to just 2.2%. How did this happen, and how has the mobile industry changed over the last 30 years?

This video by James Eagle chronicles the evolution of the mobile phone market, showing the rise and fall of various mobile phone manufacturers. The data spans from December 1992 to December 2021.

Motorola is known for being a pioneer in the mobile phone industry.

In 1983, the American company launched one of the worlds first commercially available mobile phonesthe DynaTAC 8000X. The revolutionary analog phone cost nearly $4,000 and offered users up to 30 minutes of talk time before needing to be recharged.

Motorola went on to launch a few more devices over the next few years, like the MicroTAC 9800X in 1989 and the International 3200 in 1992, and quickly became a dominant player in the nascent industry. In the early days of the market, the companys only serious competitor was Finnish multinational Nokia, which had acquired the early mobile network pioneer Mobira.

But by the mid-1990s, other competitors like Sony and Siemens started to gain some solid footing, which chipped away at Motorolas dominance. In September 1995, the companys market share was down to 32.1%.

By January 1999, Nokia surpassed Motorola as the leading mobile phone manufacturer, accounting for 21.4% of global market share. That put it just slightly ahead of Motorolas 20.8%.

One of the reasons for Nokias surging popularity was the major headway the company was making in the digital phone space. In 1999, the company released the Nokia 7110, the first mobile phone to have a web browser.

But it wasnt just Nokias innovations that were hampering Motorola. In 1999, Motorola fell on hard times after one of its spin-off projects called Iridium SSC filed for bankruptcy. This put a massive financial strain on the company, and it eventually laid off a large chunk of its workforce after the project failed.

From then on, Motorolas market share hovered between 14% and 20%, until Apples iPhone entered the scene in 2007 and turned the mobile phone industry on its head.

Things really started to change with the launch of the iPhone in 2007.

In a keynote presentation at the San Francisco Macworld Expo in 2007, Steve Jobs presented the iPhone as three products wrapped into one device: a touchscreen iPod, a revolutionary cell phone, and an internet communications device.

One year later, Apple launched the App Store, which gave users the ability to download applications and games onto their iPhones. Not only did this greatly enhance the iPhones functionality, but it also allowed consumers to customize their mobile devices like never before.

This was the start of a new era of smartphonesone that Motorola failed to keep up with. Less than two years after the iPhone launched, Apple had captured 17.4% of the mobile phone market. In contrast, Motorolas market share had shrunk down to 4.9%.

By the end of 2021, Apple held about 27.3% of the global mobile market. The iPhone is a key part of the tech giants growth, driving more than 50% of the companys overall revenue.

While a number of factors contributed to Motorolas downfall, many point to one central hurdlethe companys failure to pivot.

The iPhones emergence was the start of a new, software-driven era. Motorola had mastered the hardware-driven era, but failed to keep up when the tides changed. And the animation above highlights other companies that also failed to adapt or keep up, including BlackBerry (formerly RIM), Palm, Sony, and LG.

But Apple is not alone. The popularity of Googles Android mobile operating system has helped competitors like South Koreas Samsung and Chinas Huawei and Xiaomi flourish, with each company establishing strong footholds in the global mobile phone market.

In todays fast-paced world, the ability to pivot is essential if businesses want to remain competitive. Will todays mobile phone giants like Apple and Samsung remain on top? Or will other companies like Huawei catch up in the next few years?

Read the original here:
Synthetic Biology: The $3.6 Trillion Science Changing Life as We Know It - Visual Capitalist

New Delhi: Vineeta Agarwala, the wife of Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal, is now making headlines amid Elon Musks $44 billion takeover deal.

Her role as general partner at Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) a top US VC firm which has agreed to pay $400 million as part of Musks new $7.1 billion financing commitments is set to create a conflict of interest.

As a general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, she leads investments for the firms bio and health fund across therapeutics, life sciences tools/diagnostics, and digital health, with a focus on companies leveraging unique datasets to improve drug development and patient care delivery.

Andreessen Horowitz is also one of the biggest backers of Facebook (now Meta).

Prior to joining a16z, Vineeta held many different roles in the healthcare space.

She was a physician taking care of patients, an operator at health tech startups and as a venture investor on the Google Ventures life sciences team.

She was an early data scientist at Kyruus, a management consultant for biotech, pharmaceutical, and medical device clients at McKinsey & Co; and a director of product management at Flatiron Health.

She has collaborated with academic researchers at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and the Broad Institute, where she did graduate work in computational biology and human genetics.

Vineeta holds a Bachelor of Science in biophysics from Stanford University, and MD and PhD degrees from Harvard Medical School/MIT.

She continues to see patients at Stanford as an adjunct clinical professor in the Division of Primary Care and Population Health.

Vineeta serves on a number of portfolio company boards, including BigHat Biosciences, GC Therapeutics, Memora Health, Thyme Care, Pearl Health, and Waymark.

Parag studied BTech in Computer Science and Engineering at IIT Bombay and completed his PhD from Stanford University.

They have a son named Ansh and the couple is based in San Francisco, California.

Meanwhile, there are doubts over Parags future once Musk takes over, as the Tesla CEO himself can become a temporary CEO of the platform. According to reports, Musk may have also lined up a new Twitter CEO.

Parag is likely to receive nearly $39 million due to a clause in his contract once he leaves Twitter. His total compensation for 2021 was $30.4 million, largely in stocks.

Read the original:
Parag Agrawals wife Vineeta linked with Musks Twitter takeover - The Siasat Daily

ST. JOHN'S, N.L. Some looked tired, but there were smiles on the faces of Ukrainian refugees who made their way through the arrivals area of St. Johns International Airport Monday night, May 9.

Smiles have been hard to come by for Ukrainians fleeing their country under the danger of Russian bombs and ground assaults.

Many of their homes and communities have been left in rubble since the war began on Feb. 24.

One hundred and sixty-six Ukrainian refugees arrived on a charter flight from Poland and were welcomed by Premier Andrew Furey, Immigration Minister Gerry Byrne, the Association for New Canadians, the Canadian Red Cross and many others.

A number of residents arrived at the airport to show support, clapping and shouting welcome as the newcomers passed through the crowd.

Sofiia Shapoval was patiently waiting for her mother, Natalia, and little sister, Zoriana, 9, to arrive. When Zoriana saw Sofiia through the crowd she began jumping excitedly and waving her hand.

Sofiia came to Memorial University last September to study human genetics. After Russia invaded Ukraine in February, she began trying to get her mother and sister to the province.

I was at the other side of the world and wondered how could I help them, Sofiia said. But now they are here and Im so glad to see them.

I was at the other side of the world and wondered how could I help them. But now they are here and Im so glad to see them. Sofiia Shapoval

Stan, a 28-year-old mining engineer, will go to a mining job in central Newfoundland. He said he was in Europe when the war broke out and was going to return to fight, but his father, an officer in the Ukrainian army, told him not to.

He said, As I am in this war, you go and have your chance for your future, Stan said. I am very thankful for my father, and Im worried about him.

After clearing customs and speaking with the premier and others at the airport's arrival area, the Ukrainians were transported to their awaiting accommodations.

Megan Morris, executive director of the Association for New Canadians, said they will work with the newcomers to help them find housing, place their children in school, teach them English and match them with available jobs.

Its a pretty amazing time and you can tell by all the folks around us that theres so many people contributing to this effort, Morris said. Our organization is a resettlement agency, so this is the stuff we do all the time, and our folks are preparing to do the work they normally do to support this effort.

Rosanna Compagnon showed up at the airport toting a welcome sign and an eagerness to let the Ukrainians know they are cared about.

Ive been thinking of all the terrible things happening in Ukraine, and I thought Id come out and show my love and support for them, and see if theres anything I can do to cheer them up, Compagnon said. I thought even my little bit would help.

Russia launched what it termed a "special military operation" on Feb. 24 at targets across Ukraine not just the disputed eastern regions most suspected Russia would focus on and in the more than two months since have killed many civilians, and levelled communities and homes. Despite strong resistance and resilience by the Ukrainian army, the death, destruction and chaos has been devastating on the Ukrainian people.

As atrocities of war are inflicted on Ukraine by Russia, the people of this province are standing up and standing tall, Furey said in the House of Assembly earlier on Monday. We stand with Ukraine.

The world has been reminded of what is the true face of courage and resolve in Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. As his nation fights for freedom, we will do all we can to support and ease the burdens of Ukrainian families.

After the war began, the enormous humanitarian crisis developed quickly as people fled cities and towns pounded by bombs and invading forces. Furey said the province stepped up immediately with a made-in-Newfoundland and Labrador response.

The government announced on March 17 it had expanded its Ukrainian Family Support Desk initiative to Poland to undertake direct outreach to people who had fled Ukraine and who may be looking for information about coming to Newfoundland and Labrador.

To our knowledge, we are the first state actor in North America to organize a humanitarian airlift of Ukrainians to our shores, Furey said. Our understanding and our place on the world stage is reflected in this deliberate act.

All arriving Ukrainians have been granted the Canada-Ukraine Authorization for Emergency Travel Visa that legally allows them to live and work in Canada for up to three years.Ukrainians arriving in Newfoundland and Labrador under the emergency travel visa will also receive provincialMedical Care Plan and Prescription Drug Plan coverage.

With Monday evenings arrival of Ukrainian refugees and the hopes that more will arrive in the weeks to come, the provincial government is reminding residents how they can help welcome and support the newcomers.

Residents can help by: identifying job opportunities for Ukrainians and sending those positions to[emailprotected]; sending offers of accommodation and donations of goods and/or services to the Association for New Canadians (ANC) Ukraine support team at[emailprotected]or 709-325-0881; and donating to ANC's new Canadiansemergency fund.

The ANC is also recruiting volunteers to participate as: interpreters (Ukrainian and other languages); family match program participants (volunteers are matched with newcomers to help with English as a second language learning through friendship; activities could include exploring the city, sightseeing, going for walks and sharing meals together); and conversation circle partners (newcomers are given the opportunity to start practising conversational English). Those interested in volunteering are asked to register for orientation by emailing[emailprotected].

The ANC is searching for a donations centre to house physical donations, such as furniture and clothing. Residents are asked to hold onto donations until a space is found.

Continue reading here:
Seeking safe haven from war in Ukraine: Ukrainian refugees happy to find peace and friendship in Newfoundland and Labrador - Saltwire

When researching archaeological material, each individual detail determines the overall picture. In order to see the whole, it is not only important to determine how the finds are situated in the ground in relation to each other, but also what the purpose and the usage of these ancient objects was, what was the human genetic code and how society functioned. These elements help us better understand the activities people were engaged with, the life they were living, their worldview and their self-perception.

Language plays an important role in shaping our way of thinking. The world around us also affects our language. Language is the basis for understanding each other, connecting people living far apart. The study of languages spoken in the past is based on historical written sources and on oral tradition that has been passed down to us. So we know that the village of Kukruse was originally called Kuckarus.

But what was the language spoken among the Kukruse people? We know Kukruse is geographically located in northeastern Estonia, and in the 12th-13th centuries, around the time Kukruse people lived, who carried a similar material culture and probably spoke a similar northern Estonian language lived further to the west of the village of Kukruse.

To the east of Kukruse village, however, a lot of archeological material typical of Votian culture has been found, which is why it can be assumed that the Votian language was spoken there. More objects similar to the western finds were found in Kukruse cemetery, but also some Votian-like objects. Therefore, it can be assumed that the village was bordering between two language groups.

Apparently, Kukruse people spoke northern Estonian, but their vocabulary may have been intertwined with loan words from the Votian language. Did they distinguish between two different languages? What is certain, however, is that their language was rich - the material finds at the cemetery are abundant, and all these objects of their material culture had to have a word assigned to them!

To make sense of the lives of people who have lived in the past just a few details are not enough; it is also necessary to grasp the entire socio-cultural background and their value-system. Genetic data allows us to determine several early migration patters: For example, the movement of Finno-Ugric people from their origins in the Ural Mountains to the Baltic Sea. We can see from the remains of the man from Kukruse that in his veins flowed both the blood of hunter-gatherers and Baltic Finns.

Stable isotopes analysis of bones and of fat molecules found on cooking pots help to recreate their diets and daily lives. In the case of the lord of Kukruse finding and also other men excavated from the cemetery, what becomes evident that fish was an important part of their diet.

However, the village of Kukruse was not a fishing village. Their life as farmers is also confirmed by the food of Kukruse women that consisted primarily of land products such as milk and porridge. Thus, the role that Kukruse men played in their village took them on frequent expeditions, where the most easily available food was fish.

According to one theory, the men of Kukruse crossed the Gulf on the southern coast of Finland in search of trade partners. This means that they crossed the bay with items of interest to the people of the other side or brought something of their liking back.

The discovered puzzle pieces help to put together a portrait of the young man of Kukruse. Knowing that there were similar finds in cemeteries across Estonia, we can talk about the history of peoples of Estonia based on the example of the Kukruse man.

This is not just the story of the man of Kukruse or the village of Kukruse. The individual knowledge gaps that emerged from archeology, archaeological chemistry, genetics and linguistics help to capture the whole picture of the past more accurately; but honestly, they also raise a number of new questions.

The new questions raised by the research are on the one hand a research pain, but on the other a research pleasure.

If we knew everything about the past, there would be nothing left to discover.

The approximately 800-year-old Kukruse Cemetery was discovered in 2009 in the village of the same name, during the construction of the Tallinn-Narva highway section.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!

Read more:
People living around Gulf of Finland had close links 800 years ago - ERR News

In 1996, Dolly the sheep made headlines around the world after becoming the first mammal to be successfully cloned from an adult cell. Many commentators thought this would catalyze a golden age of cloning, with numerous voices speculating that the first human clone must surely be just a few years away.

Some people suggested that human clones could play a role in eradicating genetic diseases, while others considered that the cloning process could, eventually, eliminate birth defects (despite research by a group of French scientists in 1999 finding that cloning may actually increase the risk of birth defects).

There have been various claims all unfounded, it is important to add of successful human cloning progams since the success of Dolly. In 2002, Brigitte Boisselier, a French chemist and devout supporter of Ralism a UFO religion based on the idea that aliens created humanity claimed that she and a team of scientists had successfully delivered the first cloned human, whom she named Eve.

However, Boisselier was unwilling or indeed unable to provide any evidence, and so it is widely believed to be a hoax.

So why, almost 30 years on from Dolly, haven't humans been cloned yet? Is it primarily for ethical reasons, are there technological barriers, or is it simply not worth doing?

Related: What are the alternatives to animal testing?

"Cloning" is a broad term, given it can be used to describe a range of processes and approaches, but the aim is always to produce "genetically identical copies of a biological entity," according to the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI).

Any attempted human cloning would most likely utilize "reproductive cloning" techniques an approach in which a "mature somatic cell," most probably a skin cell, would be used, according to NHGRI. The DNA extracted from this cell would be placed into the egg cell of a donor that has "had its own DNA-containing nucleus removed."

The egg would then begin to develop in a test tube before being "implanted into the womb of an adult female," according to NHGRI.

However, while scientists have cloned many mammals, including cattle, goats, rabbits and cats, humans have not made the list.

"I think there is no good reason to make [human] clones," Hank Greely, a professor of law and genetics at Stanford University who specializes in ethical, legal and social issues arising from advances in the biosciences, told Live Science in an email.

"Human cloning is a particularly dramatic action, and was one of the topics that helped launch American bioethics," Greely added.

The ethical concerns around human cloning are many and varied. According to Britannica, the potential issues encompass "psychological, social and physiological risks." These include the idea that cloning could lead to a "very high likelihood" of loss of life, as well as concerns around cloning being used by supporters of eugenics. Furthermore, according to Britannica, cloning could be deemed to violate "principles of human dignity, freedom and equality."

In addition, the cloning of mammals has historically resulted in extremely high rates of death and developmental abnormalities in the clones, Live Science previously reported.

Another core issue with human cloning is that, rather than creating a carbon copy of the original person, it would produce an individual with their own thoughts and opinions.

"We've all known clones identical twins are clones of each other and thus we all know that clones aren't the same person," Greely explained.

A human clone, Greely continued, would only have the same genetic makeup as someone else they would not share other things such as personality, morals or sense of humor: these would be unique to both parties.

People are, as we well know, far more than simply a product of their DNA. While it is possible to reproduce genetic material, it is not possible to exactly replicate living environments, create an identical upbringing, or have two people encounter the same life experiences.

So, if scientists were to clone a human, would there be any benefits, scientific or otherwise?

"There are none that we should be willing to consider," Greely said, emphasizing that the ethical concerns would be impossible to overlook.

However, if moral considerations were removed entirely from the equation, then "one theoretical benefit would be to create genetically identical humans for research purposes," Greely said, though he was keen to reaffirm his view that this should be thought of as "an ethical non-starter."

Greely also stated that, regardless of his own personal opinion, some of the potential benefits associated with cloning humans have, to a certain degree, been made redundant by other scientific developments.

"The idea of using cloned embryos for purposes other than making babies, for example producing human embryonic stem cells identical to a donor's cells, was widely discussed in the early 2000s," he said, but this line of research became irrelevant and has subsequently not been expanded upon post-2006, the year so-called induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) were discovered. These are "adult" cells that have been reprogrammed to resemble cells in early development.

Shinya Yamanaka, a Japanese stem cell researcher and 2012 Nobel Prize winner, made the discovery when he "worked out how to return adult mouse cells to an embryonic-like state using just four genetic factors," according to an article in Nature. The following year, Yamanaka, alongside renowned American biologist James Thompson, managed to do the same with human cells.

When iPSCs are "reprogrammed back into an embryonic-like pluripotent state," they enable the "development of an unlimited source of any type of human cell needed for therapeutic purposes," according to the Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Therefore, instead of using embryos, "we can effectively do the same thing with skin cells," Greely said.

This development in iPSC technology essentially rendered the concept of using cloned embryos both unnecessary and scientifically inferior.

Related: What is the most genetically diverse species?

Nowadays, iPSCs can be used for research in disease modeling, medicinal drug discovery and regenerative medicine, according to a 2015 paper published in the journal Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology.

Additionally, Greely also suggested that human cloning may simply no longer be a "sexy" area of scientific study, which could also explain why it has seen very little development in recent years.

He pointed out that human germline genome editing is now a more interesting topic in the public's mind, with many curious about the concept of creating "super babies," for example. Germline editing, or germline engineering, is a process, or series of processes, that create permanent changes to an individuals genome. These alterations, when introduced effectively, become heritable, meaning they will be handed down from parent to child.

Such editing is controversial and yet to be fully understood. In 2018, the Council of Europe Committee on Bioethics, which represents 47 European states, released a statement saying that "ethics and human rights must guide any use of genome editing technologies in human beings," adding that "the application of genome editing technologies to human embryos raises many ethical, social and safety issues, particularly from any modification of the human genome which could be passed on to future generations."

However, the council also noted that there is "strong support" for using such engineering and editing technologies to better understand "the causes of diseases and their future treatment," noting that they offer "considerable potential for research in this field and to improve human health."

George Church, a geneticist and molecular engineer at Harvard University, supports Greely's assertion that germline editing is likely to garner more scientific interest in the future, especially when compared with "conventional" cloning.

"Cloning-based germline editing is typically more precise, can involve more genes, and has more efficient delivery to all cells than somatic genome editing," he told Live Science.

However, Church was keen to urge caution, and admitted that such editing has not yet been mastered.

"Potential drawbacks to address include safety, efficacy and equitable access for all," he concluded.

Originally published on Live Science.

Read more here:
Why haven't we cloned a human yet? - Livescience.com

UPPSALA, Sweden, May 09, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Olink Holding AB (publ) (Nasdaq: OLK) today announced that Oxford Genomics at the University of Oxford adopts the Olink technology and becomes the first Olink certified laboratory in the United Kingdom. The partnership will enable novel techniques to unravel mechanisms of disease using the Olink Explore platform.

Oxford Genomics is centered within the Wellcome Centre of Human Genetics which was formed in the founding years of the Human Genome Project; they have been producing cutting edge research for more than two decades. As we move into an age of multi-omic analysis to truly understand the linkage between disease and phenotype, proteomics is an essential tool to complement their other cutting-edge technologies.

With the recent establishment of the Oxford-GSK Institute, Olink Explore will be utilized to build a multiomics approach to mapping molecular mechanisms of complex diseases such as Parkinsons and Alzheimers. Expertise in machine learning and bioinformaticians at Oxfords Big Data Institute will be able to leverage these datasets to pinpoint novel targets and identify signatures to stratify patients.

By utilizing the Olink platform we are interested in discovering biomarkers and early disease signatures in common diseases, because they would provide clues to druggable targets and readouts we can use to test potential therapeutic candidates, said Prof John Todd Director of Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics and Co-Director of Oxford GSK Institute. We are trying to make the drug development process more precise by understanding the heterogeneity in the patients instead of one drug fits all.

The new Olink Explore 3072 platform enables access to an expanded library of carefully curated and validated assays to provide detailed proteomics data to improve understanding of human health. The Olink market-leading proteomics solution measures up to 3,000 proteins per sample using Proximity Extension Assay (PEA) technology combined with next generation (NGS) sequencing readout, providing a highly accurate and reproducible multiplexed method with exceptional specificity.

We are immensely proud to lay the foundation of a long lasting and prosperous partnership with such a prestigious institution as the University of Oxford, utilizing our technology as the first Olink certified laboratory in the United Kingdom. This partnership demonstrates the importance of academic partners in pioneering the establishment of new technologies. It will further democratize the use of the Olink platform in line with our mission to accelerate proteomics together with the scientific community, said Jon Heimer, CEO, Olink Proteomics. The objective is to create a better understanding of the origin of diseases, provide earlier and more accurate diagnoses with individualized treatment and enable more efficient and safer drug development.

Investor Contact Jan Medina, CFAVP Investor Relations & Capital MarketsMobile: +1617802 4157jan.medina@olink.com

Media Contact Andrea PranderCorporate Communications Manager Mobile: +46768775 275andrea.prander@olink.com

About OlinkOlink Holding AB (Nasdaq: OLK) is a company dedicated to accelerating proteomics together with the scientific community, across multiple disease areas to enable new discoveries and improve the lives of patients. Olink provides a platform of products and services which are deployed across major pharmaceutical companies and leading clinical and academic institutions to deepen the understanding of real-time human biology and drive 21st century healthcare through actionable and impactful science. The company was founded in 2016 and is well established across Europe, North America and Asia. Olink is headquartered in Uppsala, Sweden.

About Wellcome Centre for Human GeneticsThe Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics (WCHG) is a research institute of theNuffield Department of Medicineat theUniversity of Oxford, funded by the University,Wellcome,and numerous other sponsors. It is based in purpose-built laboratories on the University of Oxfords Biomedical Research Campus in Headington, one of the largest concentrations of biomedical expertise in the world. Here our researchers are able to work closely with colleagues across University departments including, but not limited to, theDepartment of Psychiatry, theDivision of Cardiovascular Medicineand theBig Data Institute.

With more than 400 active researchers and around 70 employed in administrative and support roles, the Centre is an international leader in genetics, genomics and structural biology. WCHG collaborates with research teams across the world on a number of large-scale studies in these areas. WCHGs researchers expend close to 20m annually in competitively-won grants, and publish around 300 primary papers per year.https://www.well.ox.ac.uk/

About the University of OxfordOxford University has been placed number 1 in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings for the sixth year running, andnumber2 in the QS World Rankings 2022. At the heart of this successare the twin-pillars ofour ground-breaking research and innovationand our distinctive educational offer.

Oxford is world-famous for researchand teachingexcellence and home to some of the most talented people from across the globe.Our work helps the lives of millions, solving real-world problems through a huge network of partnerships and collaborations. The breadth and interdisciplinary nature of our researchalongside our personalised approach to teachingsparks imaginative and inventive insights and solutions.

Through its research commercialisation arm, Oxford University Innovation, Oxford is the highest university patent filer in the UK and is ranked first in the UK for university spinouts, having created more than 200 new companies since 1988. Over a third of these companies have been created in the past three years.The university is a catalyst for prosperity in Oxfordshire and the United Kingdom, contributing15.7 billion to the UK economyin 2018/19, and supports more than 28,000 full time jobs.

Forward-Looking StatementsThis release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws, including the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended, including, without limitation, statements regarding Olinks strategy, business plans and focus. The words may, will, could, would, should, expect, plan, anticipate, intend, believe, estimate, predict, project, potential, continue, target and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words. Any forward-looking statements in this press release are based on managements current expectations and beliefs as of the date hereof and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and important factors that may cause actual events or results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements contained in this press release, including, without limitation, those related to Olinks business, operations, supply chain, strategy, goals and anticipated timelines, including for the delivery of Olink Explore 3072 and the expansion of the Explore platform, competition, and other risks identified in the section entitled Risk Factors in Olinks Registration Statement on Form F-1, as amended (File No. 333-253818) filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and in the other filings, reports, and documents Olink files with the SEC from time to time. Olink expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements in this release to reflect any change in its expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based, unless required by law or regulation.

Go here to see the original:
University of Oxford adopts Olink technology to advance protein biomarker discovery and unravel mechanisms of disease - GlobeNewswire

Ive been reading the many recent letters regarding the likely reversal of Roe v. Wade. The writer of The case for overturning Roe v Wade has it right by pointing out that there is absolutely nothing in the U.S. Constitution that provides for a right to abortion. The writer however said he was pro-choice, stating that one of the reasons for this was the small size of the unborn baby at the time of most abortions. But of course we were all small during those first several months in our mothers womb, and yet our complete human genetics were already set from the moment of conception.

The writer also said that women should have absolute bodily autonomy, again intentionally ignoring the absolute scientific fact that theres another body involved - that of her not yet born little girl or boy. We keep hearing follow the science, but when the science shows 100% that unique human life begins at conception, abortion supporters pretend science doesnt matter here.

Another writer mistakenly took it upon himself to be able to look into everyone elses hearts and minds and decide that Its about control, not babies . By this he meant people trying to control women. While I dont have the ability to judge others like that writer, I do know from years of working with pro-life that it is about both protecting unborn babies, and offering life-options help to women. Thankfully, I found one point of agreement in his letter, that being that God still loves those who choose abortion. Such merciful love provides forgiveness and restoration for those who repent and receive it.

Several writers blamed the Catholic Church for Roes reversal. While Catholics have been at the forefront working to restore protection for innocent human life in the womb; be assured that there are also tens of millions of other-than-Catholics who are working and praying for this as well.

Also, we keep hearing of the need for abortions to be legal and safe. Well, as pointed out above, legal abortions certainly arent safe for the 50% of the human lives involved who are killed by abortion. In addition, many of the legal abortions arent physically safe for the mother as well. And, they certainly arent safe emotionally, as there is often a lifetime of guilt to deal with.

The bottom line is that intentionally killing innocent human life is most certainly not reproductive health care. Rather, we need to continue to support women who find themselves in an unexpected pregnancy - as is being done with the ever increasing number of pregnancy help centers and homes, church programs and adoption options. Where there is genuine medical need during a pregnancy, there is help available to protect both the life of the mother and her unborn.

Finally, as another writer pointed out, its way past time to stop pretending otherwise - abortion ends the life of a unique and innocent human being! Every human life conceived is a gift of God, created in his image. May we all say no to Roe and yes to life!

Ken Koehler lives in West Fargo.

This letter does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.

Originally posted here:
Letter: Why no to Roe and abortion - INFORUM